Please Debunk The Moon Landing Hoax For Me...

Originally posted by snarfbot
theres a few key pieces in the moon hoax theory,

1. is the flag waving video, theres a flag, an astronaut runs past it. and it waves as if being effected by air. this is a video that appears to prove
that it was moving, before the astronaut could have physically contacted it.

Not going to debunk flags waving. It's been debunked so many times conclusively that there is no excuse for posting it.

Originally posted by snarfbot

2. the footprints under and around the lunar lander, which were allegedly from a previous apollo mission, which remained even after a rocket was fired
over them. some claim there should be a huge crater below the nozzle.

this one seems like a pretty straight forward experiment, put a scale rocket in a vacuum chamber on a pile of dust and see what happens am i right?

This is nonsense. All the Apollo landings were in different places. No "previous apollo [sic] mission" erased the footprints.

Originally posted by snarfbot

3. all that radiation. nasa now claims the cosmic rays and stuff are too deadly for us to send astronauts back to the moon, even though we apparently
got away with it 40 years ago. its worth noting that one apollo astronaut did die of cancer, although that cant be interpreted as causality.

so the above in combination with a general lack of evidence, the missing telemetry tapes, the moon rocks that are virtually identical to earth rocks
and stuff, that adds weight to their arguments.

but again, who knows right.

Please provide a citation for your claim that NASA is refusing to send astronauts back to the moon due to deadly cosmic rays. Please take into account
the long exposures to space during EVA's aboard the space station. Also take into account the fairly detailed science behind the very thin shielding
that was used on board the Apollo missions.

The problem with debunking anything around here is that no one is interested in facts. It's all conjecture, misremembered details, continuous
recycling of thoroughly debunked arguments and most importantly complete and total disregard of the tens of terabytes of data available directly from
the Apollo missions online which give more detail than any one person on this site can have personally analysed.

There's a single story about the moon landing. We went there. But there are hundreds of variations in conspiracy theories. Which do you believe? The
single coherent story or the multitude of contradictory and even self-contradictory nonsense which is written by people who "doubt" that we went to
the moon.

He deserved being assaulted because he was annoying?
That explains a lot. There are threads on ATS about actual things that matter where no one is advocating violence but this moon landing stuff sure
does rile up a few folks huh?

I cannot believe people think violence is ok when questioning the moon landings. Is this what happened because they canceled Babylon 5?

He wasn't assaulted at all. That was pure self defense. Why are people even discussing this?

Nasa has just posted new High Resolution photos of the surface of the Apollo 17 landing site for our viewing they can be seen here
www.nasa.gov... have fun seeing that it was made in a Hollywood basement

Older than any rock on the earth, when it's more likely the earth was here before the moon was?

Because earth has plate tectonic and the moon doesn't. The earth may be older, but here the rocks are always being melted and solidifed again, while
on the moon they just froze, even if it once had active vulcanoes and tectonic plates.

Originally posted by XtraTL
Not going to debunk flags waving. It's been debunked so many times conclusively that there is no excuse for posting it.

i have never heard a satisfactory explanation for the flag waving in that particular video, if you actually have conclusive proof that that is
possible in a vacuum debunk away because i would like to hear it. its the purpose of the thread after all.

There's a single story about the moon landing. We went there. But there are hundreds of variations in conspiracy theories. Which do you
believe?

i dont subscribe to either theory 100%, which i thought was clear from my post, i just presented what i felt was the strongest evidence in support of
the hoax theory. im not familiar with hundreds of variations of the hoax theory either, as far as i know theres just one, that we didnt go there,
there might be several different motives for faking it, but its all basically the same thing.

Your waiting is now over. Here is an article published today 06 September 2011 by the British Broadcasting Corporation.
BBC

Apollo 17: The parallel tracks made by the Lunar Roving Vehicle ("Moon buggy") can be seen at centre-right

Probe pictures Moon landing sites

By Jonathan Amos

Science correspondent, BBC News

Remarkable new images of the Apollo landing sites on the Moon have just been released by Nasa.

The pictures clearly show the hardware left on the lunar surface by American astronauts in the 1960s and 70s, including Apollo 17's "moon buggy".

The images were acquired by the robotic Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO), which has been circling Earth's satellite since 2009.

Such shots have been returned before, but these are the best yet.

LRO has recently lowered its orbit from 50km above the Moon's surface to just 25km.

This makes it easier to see equipment, such as the descent stages that put the astronauts on the surface.

The Apollo 17, 14 and 12 sites are viewed at a resolution of 25cm by 25cm per pixel.

In an extreme blow-up of the Apollo 17 Lunar Roving Vehicle, it is just possible to discern the condition in which the astronauts Eugene Cernan and
Harrison Schmitt parked the buggy - with its wheels turned to the left.

LRO has been a highly productive mission. It was originally conceived as a robotic precursor to future manned missions, although when Nasa might
return to the lunar body is not clear.

On Thursday this week, the US space agency will launch its latest Moon mission - the Gravity Recovery and Interior Laboratory (Grail). This is a pair
of satellites that will survey the Moon's gravity in unprecedented detail to reveal its internal structure. This will help explain how the Moon formed
and why its nearside looks so different to its far-side.

Originally posted by XtraTL
Not going to debunk flags waving. It's been debunked so many times conclusively that there is no excuse for posting it.

i have never heard a satisfactory explanation for the flag waving in that particular video, if you actually have conclusive proof that that is
possible in a vacuum debunk away because i would like to hear it. its the purpose of the thread after all.

Vibration transmitted from the
astronaut touching it.

There's a single story about the moon landing. We went there. But there are hundreds of variations in conspiracy theories. Which do you
believe?

i dont subscribe to either theory 100%, which i thought was clear from my post, i just presented what i felt was the strongest evidence in support of
the hoax theory. im not familiar with hundreds of variations of the hoax theory either, as far as i know theres just one, that we didnt go there,
there might be several different motives for faking it, but its all basically the same thing.

anyway im open to both sides so proceed.

The problem with hoax theories is that you don't need truth. You can just make up nonsense as fast as
you can. Most hoax theories aren't actual theories. They're just pointing at things the Hoax Believer looks suspicious and declaring it proof the
landings never happened. The word "anomalies" is used a lot. If it is explained to them by someone who knows what they are talking about, they will
immediately rationalize it with more nonsense. They claim to be seeking the truth, whatever it may be, but have usually eliminated the official story
from the list of possibilities. When they eliminate the probable, whatever remains, however impossible, must be their truth.

He deserved being assaulted because he was annoying?
That explains a lot. There are threads on ATS about actual things that matter where no one is advocating violence but this moon landing stuff sure
does rile up a few folks huh?

I cannot believe people think violence is ok when questioning the moon landings. Is this what happened because they canceled Babylon 5?

He wasn't assaulted at all. That was pure self defense. Why are people even discussing this?

Because harassing an old man is heroic in their
eyes. The punch just made him a martyr, in HB eyes.

Please provide a citation for your claim that NASA is refusing to send astronauts back to the moon due to deadly cosmic rays. Please take into account
the long exposures to space during EVA's aboard the space station. Also take into account the fairly detailed science behind the very thin shielding
that was used on board the Apollo missions.

It's are very well being condescending towards hoax believers but you don't do yourself any favours with such a glaring mistake. All space station
EVA's occur WITHIN the radiation belts as such the exposure to solar radiation is practically zero. Outside those belts is a different matter and
very variable dependant on solar activity.

Please provide a citation for your claim that NASA is refusing to send astronauts back to the moon due to deadly cosmic rays. Please take into account
the long exposures to space during EVA's aboard the space station. Also take into account the fairly detailed science behind the very thin shielding
that was used on board the Apollo missions.

It's are very well being condescending towards hoax believers but you don't do yourself any favours with such a glaring mistake. All space station
EVA's occur WITHIN the radiation belts as such the exposure to solar radiation is practically zero. Outside those belts is a different matter and
very variable dependant on solar activity.

You do know exposure also depends on length of time, right? It doesn't matter what the base dosage
is, if the ISS receives a greater cumulative dose than the one which allegedly would've killed the astronauts.

I like how you accuse Xtra of being condescending over something he's wrong over, and then you make the exact same mistake. I also note a complete
lack of the citation Xtra asked for, or mention of shielding.

Originally posted by snarfbot
theres a few key pieces in the moon hoax theory,

1. is the flag waving video, theres a flag, an astronaut runs past it. and it waves as if being effected by air. this is a video that appears to prove
that it was moving, before the astronaut could have physically contacted it.

Not going to debunk flags waving. It's been debunked so many times conclusively that there is no excuse for posting it.

You are not going to debunk the flag waving because you can't. The flag moves and you have no logical explanation.

The more I investigate the Apollo 12 the more I am convinced they should be renamed the Dirty Dozen.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.